Take Home Assessment
Nabz
Role
Product
Tools
Team
Me, Claude Design and Claude Code
Time Taken
Sunita is 52. It's 9pm and she has just opened a lab report with 42 results. Four sit outside the normal range. She doesn't know what HbA1c or SGPT mean, and she can't reach her doctor until Monday. I had about 10 hours to design something calm that stays honest. The CX head liked the design side of my work, especially because I focused so hard on being AI native. For the second round of the interview I treated the company as my own client, built a token based design system, prepared a full dev handoff. I then deployed the app for real, from Claude Design to Claude Code to Vercel.
The company gave candidates three problems and one rule: pick one and solve it properly.
FoldAn: investing app on a bad day. Priya, 26, is down 8% at 11:40pm.
Nabz: A health report for someone who doesn't speak doctor.
Kaksha: A school app on a cheap phone and a bad connection.
I care about healthcare and lifestyle. I also believe that when health data makes people sensitive, showing the right information the right way matters even more. Nabz let me work on exactly that.
Sunita's report has 42 results in 7 groups. Four are out of range, one slight and one serious. She tested three months ago, and 28 of the 42 results have history. The brief listed what was wrong with the current product:
It speaks doctor. Expanding HbA1c to "Glycated Haemoglobin" helps nobody. She needs to know what it measures and why it matters, in her words and in Hindi.
It has no comparison with her last report, even though that change is the real story.
It shows 42 results with no answer to "so what do I do now?"
Whatever the numbers say, she will feel worse after reading. The interface may not lie to reassure her and may not give medical advice.
I had to design the report overview, one result explained plainly, the comparison with her last report, and the version she shares with her doctor. The hardest part, in the brief's words: a calm design that is still an honest one.
Fifteen minutes on the scenario
With only 10 hours, I spent 15 minutes reading and rereading the scenario. I wasn't summarizing it. I wanted to understand Sunita's pain points and the environment shaping her decisions. She's alone at 9pm, scared of a number, and nobody can answer her questions until Monday. Every choice after that came from this picture.
Then I wrote my prompt.
Questioning the AI
Most people stop at the prompt. I went back and questioned what the AI had decided for me:
Why weren't the corners rounder? Soft corners feel friendly and modern, but health data also needs to feel precise. I wanted to know if the AI chose the radius on purpose or by default.
Which competitors did it use as references? And which did it leave out, and why?
Is this modern, or just familiar? I checked whether the patterns it used were current for a reason.
That step turned AI output into a starting point I could defend on the call.
Before drawing any screens, I documented how the product should think. All of it lives on this page 1 of the Nabz Figma file
The page holds:
Scenario. Sunita's situation, copied from the brief so anyone opening the file starts with the same context.
A note on why I chose Nabz. Personal, and on the canvas where reviewers see it.
In scope. Who Sunita is, and what I know about her scan: 42 results in 7 groups, 4 out of range, and a previous report from 3 months ago with history for 28 results.
Out of scope. What I assumed about her: digital literacy, health literacy, anxiety level, Hindi preference, and accessibility needs.
Data flow, user flow, and the AI brief. [ADD: images of these three, or link to their frames.]
Compare: "Then and now"
The brief said the change since her last report is the real story, so I made comparison a top level tab next to Results.
The brief asked for six states on my main component: empty, loading, error, too little data, too much data, and longest possible text. I built them all on the Home screen, so the report overview is tested at its worst, not just its best.
I presented the work on the 45 minute call. The CX head was happy with the design side, especially since I had focused so heavily on being AI native. After the call, the CX head gave me the only hint I got: in the next interview, focus on design and expand it.
A designer on the call also told me the UI felt too heavy on content. I took that seriously. It pulled against the brief, which required the full content volume, so the answer wasn't to show less. It was to show it with better hierarchy.
I asked one question: if this app were for my own client, how would I hand it off to developers?
I went past what anyone asked for:
Built a token based design system for Nabz.
Structured tokens so they map cleanly to code.
Set everything up in auto layout so the files behave like real components.
Prepared a dev handoff an engineer could pick up without guessing.
Round two was crucial and required design depth.
